Chronological Thread 

< Chronological >      < Thread >

---

Hi David,

Thanks for your detailed response! I discovered I was slightly wrong in my assesment of the model & have updated the tracker page accordingly.

I still think a discussion page would be ideal for this kind of thing, and perhaps for model authors to leave comments / small pieces of explanation about the implementation of the model (is it based on existing files, where did the data come from, were there any errors in the paper/supplement that the model corrects, etc.).

If it's only resources that are lacking I can offer my time (but sadly no money) to help.

cheers,
Michael


On 02/14/2015 12:35 AM, David Nickerson wrote:

Hi Michael,

Thanks for the email and the notification of the problem in that
model. As per the contact page (http://www.cellml.org/about/contact),
the current method to provide this feedback is to email it to Tommy
(preferably with full URL to the version of the file you are looking
at). You can also create a tracker item in the tracker using the link
near the top of the front page of the tracker
(https://tracker.physiomeproject.org/) - I have just created a tracker
item for this issue:
https://tracker.physiomeproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3862. It is
possible to create your own fork of the workspace and make the
correction yourself (as you guessed you would not have permission to
push into the original workspace), but if you are not currently a user
of the repository it is probably better to hang off diving in - as you
may have seen in an earlier email from Tommy, we are about to
implement a major change in the repository which will alter the tools
users will use to push changes into the repository.

The concept of a discussion section or wiki page for discussion
regarding each exposure is something that we have been thinking about
for a long time now, but do not currently have the resources to devote
to implementing something. If you have any ideas or suggestions, it
would be great if you could send them through - either to this list or
the tools developers list, or create a tracker item
(https://tracker.physiomeproject.org/) for a new feature in the
repository product.

Cheers,
David.

On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:53 AM, Michael Clerx
<cell AT michaelclerx.com>
wrote:

Dear all,

I've come across a small discrepancy* in the Iyer-2004 cardiac cell model
and am wondering how to report it. The exposure page shows a mercurial link
but I'm not sure how uploading/committing with mercurial works & doubt I
have access. The model was uploaded by Catherine Lloyd who I can contact via
the website, but the file itself lists Steven Niederer as author.

So what's the best way to go about letting the world know there might be a
small error?
Perhaps it'd be a good idea if model exposure pages had some kind of comment
section or a separate discussion page like wikipedia?

kind regards,
Michael


* The IKs current formulation refers to EK, when the quoted article shows
IKs should use EKs, which is present but unused in the model

---

• [cellml-discussion] Physiome Repository backend conversion from mercurial to git, Tommy Yu, 02/04/2015
  • Re: [cellml-discussion] Physiome Repository backend conversion from mercurial to git, Tommy Yu, 02/13/2015
    • Re: [cellml-discussion] Physiome Repository backend conversion from mercurial to git, Tommy Yu, 02/13/2015
      • [cellml-discussion] What's the best way to comment on / ask about specific models?, Michael Clerx, 02/14/2015
        • Re: [cellml-discussion] What's the best way to comment on / ask about specific models?, David Nickerson, 02/14/2015
          • Re: [cellml-discussion] What's the best way to comment on / ask about specific models?, Michael Clerx, 02/15/2015
            • Re: [cellml-discussion] What's the best way to comment on / ask about specific models?, Randall Britten, 02/16/2015

---

Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.